Quote:
|
Quote:
It's just that it's hard to see how people can think that way when you're a member of a forum with countless threads devoted to tunes, supercharging, and "which exhaust should I get". It really is hard to see the "non-enthusiast" mindset. And like was said at least once already, all those people who would support the Camaro platform by buying it in 4-cylinder trim would be making it possible for you to have it in any trim at all. I wouldn't diss their choice so lightly. Norm |
Quote:
Even at stock numbers with 260 - 280HP/TQ, in a 3,3xx lb car would likely be a low 6 second 0 - 60, and mid 14 second 1/4 mile car. I think thats respectable for a base 4-cylinder car. If they decide to bump the numbers into the 300s, well then it will likely be as fast or faster than todays V6. |
Subaru's Legacy 2.5 GT (3400-ish, 260-ish) is a high 13 second car (and low 5's to 60 mph). At anything above about 2000 rpm where the boost has started to come in, you'd never guess it was "only a 4" by the seat of the pants feel.
Chevy could do far worse than target that range of performance for an I4 Camaro (and as an I4 it would have a far more pleasant exhaust note than Subaru's H4). Norm |
You guys do realize it wouldn't be the first time Camaro had 4 cylinders?...
|
Ask the guys that were buying 4 cylinder Mustangs in the 80's. Cheap, cheap, cheap. Insurance and fuel......
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Hey, here's an idea. Why not make a small turbo 4 banger like a Cobalt SS with one of their econo cars? Because if they turn the Camaro into a Cobalt or worse a Leaf then I will be in the market for a Mustang, Challenger or whoever is still making muscle cars. There are probably others who think like me. Not knocking your choice however, drive a lawn mower if you want, or a Kia hamster mobile. I like big displacement NA V8. Sue me.
|
Quote:
...I disagree with the argument that these cars need a small engine for the V-8 to even be available, (as if the fours and sixes were doing us a favor)...I see it the other way around, the V-8 gives the car it's appeal, and the Camaro wouldn't have been built if it weren't for the V-8, not the other way around... I saw the thread that showed the production numbers for the 2011-2012 Camaros...as I re-call, the V-6 was not a runaway majority, it was fairly even.... |
I can't imagine why anyone would want a 4 cylinder Camaro. I can see wanting a 4 cylinder in a car designed for a 4 cylinder engine, but I really don't see the point in bastardizing a car made for muscle.
A lot of posters seem to think everyone against the 4 cylinder Camaro are neanderthals. We're really pragmatists. We know what introducing a 4 cylinder means for V8 enthusiasts; watered-down performance and bullshit. And yes, it's been done before. It wasn't good. |
For every person who thinks chevy will make a WRX Sti, 3 more think it will be the Iron Duke.
|
Quote:
Putting a 4 cyl. engine in a camaro variant that has historically been themed as a v8 performace car (such as an SS or a Z28) to me is ridiculous because it is a compromise on the heritage of the car. The performace camaro is more (believe it or not) than just sheer numbers. The v8 camaro represents a sound, feel, persona of camaros past and present that has been characterized by their v8 motors, and as such, that persona would have very slim or no odds of being equally replicated by a different engine configuration. Its my opinion, and to me it is not a ridiculous statement. Your reply, however, leaves a lot to be desired. |
This thread makes me want to start a "Why did you get a V6 Camaro?" thread
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.